CR. MISC./9701/2026 of Vikash Jha @ Vikas Jha @ Munshi Vs The State of Bihar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.9701 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-181 Year-2025 Thana- SINDHIYA District- Samastipur ====================================================== Vikash Jha @ Vikas Jha @ Munshi S/O Ritu Kant Jha @ Ritu jha R/O Village- Agraol, P.S- Sindhia @ Singhiya, Distt.- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s Versus The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Madhav Kumar, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Rajendra Nath Jha, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR PANDEY CAV ORDER 4 17-04-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned APP for the State. 2. The petitioner has prayed for bail in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No.181 of 2025 registered for the offence punishable under Sections 103(1) & 3(5) of the B.N.S. 3. The case of the prosecution, in short, is that on 3rd October, 2025 at 04:00 P.M., accused Durgesh Jha contacted the deceased, Amit Sharma, on his mobile and invited him for a meal which led to verbal altercation. Subsequently the deceased left his residence at 07:00 P.M. against his wife’s warning, stating that his survival is depended on his Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9701 of 2026(4) dt.17-04-2026 2/4 departure. A move preceded by a history of the accused luring the victim with promises of high earnings. When the deceased failed to return, a search was conducted on 04.10.2025, leading to the discovery of his body in an orchard near the Sibaiya Dadhi embankment where the condition of the corpse shows that the deceased was brutally beaten to death by Durgesh Jha and four-five unidentified accomplices. 4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has submitted that from perusal of the FIR it is clear that the name of this petitioner is not there in the FIR. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the name of this petitioner has surfaced in this case during investigation on the basis of self-confessional statement recorded by police after taking the petitioner in custody which has got no evidentiary value in the eye of law. It has further been submitted that there is inordinate delay of one day in filing of the FIR. As per the case of the prosecution, the informant got the information about the alleged occurrence on 04.10.2025 at 02:00 P.M. but the FIR has been registered on 05.10.2025 at 10:00 A.M. and no proper explanation has been given for the delay. It demonstrates that the FIR has been lodged after due deliberation only for the purpose of falsely implicating the Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9701 of 2026(4) dt.17-04-2026 3/4 petitioner. It has further been submitted that there is no eye- witness of the whole occurrence and nothing on record came against the petitioner to show the involvement of the petitioner in this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that the main thrust of allegation is against co-accused Durgesh Jha. Learned counsel has further submitted that nothing has been recovered from the petitioner or at the disclosure of the petitioner. Save and except confessional statement there is nothing against the petitioner. Learned counsel has submitted that even the petitioner was not identified in the CCTV footage. It has further been submitted that from perusal of the post-mortem report it transpires that the deceased has received multiple bruises and the cause of death was hemorrhage and shock due to pelvis injury caused by hard and blunt substance. Learned counsel for the petitioner has lastly submitted that the petitioner is a man of clean antecedent and he is in judicial custody since 14.10.2025. 5. The application for bail is opposed by learned APP for the State. 6. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.9701 of 2026(4) dt.17-04-2026 4/4 is inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. The above named petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rs. ten thousand only) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Rosera, Samastipur in connection with Singhiya P.S. Case No.181 of 2025. 7. Accordingly, the present bail application stands allowed. durgesh/- (Ashok Kumar Pandey, J) AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE 07.04.2026 Uploading Date 17.04.2026 Transmission Date 17.04.2026